Project Blue Book case review: July-December 1955
This is the sixth edition of the Project Blue Book case review covering the second half of 1955. Like the previous evaluations, I tried to examine each case to see if the conclusion had merit. I added comments to help clarify the explanation or if I felt it was not correct or adequate.
Summary
The 16% incorrect evaluation value was similar to the 17% from the first half of 1955. One of the cases was reclassified as “UN- IDENTIFIED” simply because no potential solution could be offered. I found this case confusing because it does sound like some sort of test vehicle but there was no test craft in the area. It could be the witnesses distorted their report making it difficult to iden- tify the source. There were still a large number of cases that involved nothing more than a single message or a letter written by a witness. Such reports are difficult to evaluate and it is too bad that the staff at Blue Book was unable to obtain more information about these cases.
Quelle: SUNlite 6/2018
+++
More Blue Book moon IFOs
After last issue’s article, Herb Taylor contacted me with some additional cases and pointed out an error I made in my listing of cases .
As a result, I wanted to add to the list from last issue and also make a correction.
The error I made involved the Akron, Ohio case that I listed as February 21, 1961. It was actually January 21, 1961, which was, very likely, the moon. So, I now agree with the classification. The February 21 case was actually on February 22. It was never classified as the moon. I had made an error on transcribing the date, which sent me towards the February 22 case.
These are the additional cases mentioned by Herb in a follow-up e-mail in September 2018:
The Moon as an IFO
In my review of Blue Book cases, I will continue to look for potential moon misidentifications. I would not be surprised if I don’t find a few cases that were actually the moon and were incorrectly classified.
Notes and references
1. Taylor, Herb. E-mail to author. September 5, 2018
Quelle: SUNlite 6/2018